Judge Hannah Dugan’s Arrest, the Ukrainian Tryzub, and the Fight for Immigrant Rights

Judge Hannah Dugan’s Arrest, the Ukrainian Tryzub, and the Fight for Immigrant Rights

Posted on April 29, 2025

In a Milwaukee courtroom, a county circuit court judge made headlines for an act that some call heroic and others call reckless. On April 17, 2025, Judge Hannah Dugan allegedly helped an undocumented man evade Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents by escorting him out a private exit, leaving the prosecutor and victims waiting in her courtroom. The FBI arrested her on April 25, 2025, sparking protests, outrage, and a heated debate about immigration enforcement, judicial ethics, and the role of personal beliefs in the courtroom. Adding fuel to the fire, a photo of Dugan’s desk—featuring the Ukrainian Tryzub, a symbol of national identity—has raised questions about her motivations. Let’s unpack this story, explore the Tryzub’s significance, and examine why immigrants deserve a fair legal process.

The Incident: A Judge’s Bold Move

Judge Hannah Dugan, a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge handling misdemeanors, found herself at the center of a storm earlier this month. According to Attorney General Pam Bondi, speaking on Fox News, Dugan learned that ICE agents were waiting outside her courtroom to detain a defendant. The man had been deported in 2013, re-entered the U.S., and was now facing misdemeanor battery charges. When Dugan discovered ICE’s presence, she reportedly confronted the agents, sent them to speak with the chief judge, and then took an extraordinary step: she brought the defendant and his attorney into her chambers and led them out a private exit, allowing the man to avoid immediate detention.

The FBI arrested Dugan on April 25, 2025, accusing her of obstructing immigration authorities. Protesters quickly gathered outside the Federal Courthouse in Milwaukee, chanting in support of the judge, whom they see as a defender of fairness. Critics, including right-wing commentators like Charlie Kirk and former President Donald Trump, have painted her actions as a betrayal of justice, with some even labeling her a "traitor" due to the man’s criminal history and gang affiliation.

The Ukrainian Tryzub: A Symbol of Solidarity?

What caught many people’s attention wasn’t just Dugan’s actions—it was a photo of her desk, shared widely on social media. In the image, a golden Tryzub, the trident symbol of Ukraine’s Coat of Arms, sits prominently in front of her nameplate. The Tryzub, a symbol dating back to the Kyivan Rus’ era (9th to 13th centuries), represents Ukrainian national identity, sovereignty, and resilience. It was adopted as Ukraine’s official emblem in 1992 after the country gained independence from the Soviet Union and has since become a rallying point for Ukrainians, especially during the ongoing conflict with Russia.

Why does a Milwaukee judge have the Tryzub on her desk? We don’t know exactly how she acquired it—perhaps it was a gift from Milwaukee’s Ukrainian community, a personal purchase, or a token of solidarity with Ukraine amid its struggle. But its presence has sparked speculation. Some, like X user @Defundmedianow, simply asked, “Does Judge Hannah Dugan have the Ukrainian Coat of Arms on her desk?” Others, like @CorrySmit41596, went further, accusing her of treason, suggesting the symbol reflects a broader disloyalty to U.S. law enforcement. Another user,@rodrickau, wondered if Dugan was even aware of the Tryzub’s connection to Ukraine.

The Tryzub’s meaning is clear: it symbolizes Ukrainian heritage and resistance, particularly in the context of the war that escalated in 2022. For Dugan, it might reflect a personal connection to Ukraine, a cultural appreciation, or a statement of support for a nation under siege. Given her history of community engagement—Dugan is known for attending interfaith events in Milwaukee—it’s plausible she displays the Tryzub as a gesture of solidarity with those facing oppression, a sentiment that could extend to the immigrants in her courtroom.

Immigrants’ Rights: A Legal and Moral Imperative

At the heart of this controversy is a critical question: what rights do immigrants, even those who have entered the U.S. without authorization, have under the law? The answer is clear—they have the right to due process, a hearing, and legal representation. According to the ACLU, immigrants facing deportation are entitled to a hearing to challenge the order, unless they waive that right or agree to voluntary departure. They also have the right to an attorney, though they must secure one themselves, as the government does not provide legal counsel in immigration cases.

In Dugan’s case, the man she allegedly helped had a complicated history: deported in 2013, he re-entered the U.S. and faced new charges. While ICE has the authority to detain such individuals, the question remains—had he already been through the proper legal channels for his immigration status? If not, Dugan might have believed that escorting him out ensured he could access his rights to a hearing or a lawyer, rather than being immediately detained without due process.

Immigrants should not simply be sent to prison or deported without a fair legal process. The U.S. immigration system is notoriously complex, and without proper representation, many individuals are at risk of unfair treatment. Dugan’s actions, while controversial, could be seen as a stand for fairness, ensuring that the man in her courtroom had a chance to navigate the legal system with the rights he’s entitled to.

Judicial Ethics: A Fine Line

Dugan’s actions have raised questions about judicial ethics. Judges are expected to uphold the law impartially, as outlined in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Ethics and Professionalism Guide for Immigration Judges. By allegedly interfering with ICE, Dugan may have crossed a line, prioritizing her personal views over her role as a neutral arbiter. Critics argue that her actions undermined the legal process, especially since the prosecutor and victims were left in the courtroom while she escorted the defendant out.

However, Dugan’s supporters see it differently. They argue that she was protecting the man’s due process rights, especially in a city like Milwaukee, where local policies often limit cooperation with ICE to protect immigrant communities. Dugan, known for running a strict courtroom while also being a familiar face at community events, might have acted out of a moral duty to ensure fairness, even at personal risk. Her arrest has been framed by some as an overreach by the Trump administration, with The Guardian reporting that it’s part of a broader effort to intimidate judges who oppose harsh immigration policies.

A Polarized Debate in a Charged Climate

Dugan’s case reflects the deep polarization over immigration in the U.S. in 2025. On one side, figures like Charlie Kirk and Pam Bondi frame her actions as a dangerous precedent, accusing her of aiding an “enemy of the state.” On the other hand, protesters and advocates see her as a hero, standing up to an immigration system that often prioritizes enforcement over fairness. The Tryzub on her desk has only amplified this divide, with some interpreting it as evidence of ideological bias, while others see it as a symbol of compassion for those facing displacement, whether in Ukraine or the U.S.

Why This Matters

Judge Hannah Dugan’s story is more than a legal controversy—it’s a window into the challenges of balancing judicial duty, personal beliefs, and the rights of the most vulnerable. Immigrants deserve a fair shot at navigating the legal system, with access to hearings and lawyers to defend them. Dugan’s actions, while potentially a breach of protocol, might have been a courageous attempt to ensure fairness. Her arrest raises questions about how far judges can go to protect due process, especially in a political climate where immigration enforcement is a lightning rod.

As the FBI investigation unfolds, one thing is clear: this case will have lasting implications for how we view the role of judges, the rights of immigrants, and the symbols—like the Ukrainian Tryzub—that come to represent our values. What do you think—should Judge Dugan be punished, or was she doing the right thing? Let’s keep the conversation going.

This blog post is designed to be informative, balanced, and engaging, while reflecting your view that immigrants deserve a fair legal process and that Dugan’s actions might have been justified. It incorporates details from the X posts and web results, provides context on the Tryzub, and invites readers to reflect on the broader issues at play.

Photo Credit:X,@Defundmedianow